Part of the Global Plot to Expose Moonbats, conspiracy nuts, and anti-Semites, especially the Jewish anti-Semitic variety.
The leftwing Neo-Nazi web magazine Counterpunch has described Plaut thus: "One of the most pernicious writers is Steven Plaut, a man who could be thought of as Israel's Daniel Pipes."

Sunday, July 10, 2011

The Knesset Strikes Back against the Boycotters

1. The Knesset is about to pass a law that would criminalize thoseIsraelis working for boycotts of Israel and of parts of Israel. Itwould cover those calling for boycotts of Israeli institutions,including the Ariel University. Indeed, the more controversial partof the law is the section that creates sanctions and punishments forthose working for boycotts of West Bank institutions and producers.See this report:http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4093150,00.html Theradical Left is of course hysterical. Leftists opposed to freedom ofspeech are rolling their eyes and warning that the bill restrictsfreedom of speech. Fascist leftists are screaming that the lawrepresents Israeli fascism. Not a single one of those leftists hasspoken up against the suppression of freedom of speech for rabbis.With one exception: to my amazement the head of the American chapterof Betselem DID so speak out in YNET (Hebrew only).

I welcome the sections of the bill that criminalize those Israelileftists and Arabs engaged in economic warfare against their owncountry, including via the so-called "BDS or "boycott, sanction,divestment" movement. Winston Churchill would never have toleratedBritish fascists calling for world boycotts of trade with Britainduring World War II. I am less comfortable with the parts of the billcriminalizing boycotts against West Bank settlements. Rather thancriminalize those who boycott Ariel University, I would prefer toboycott those Israelis who boycott Ariel, and to call for sanctionsand retaliation against the academic institutions in which extremistanti-Israel leftists are employed. I would boycott all singers andwriters who join the movement of aggression against settlers.

The law does not criminalize those who merely express an opinion, suchas someone stating he or she thinks Ariel University should beboycotted, nor consumers who wish to avoid certain products because ofpolitical prejudice against the producers. As I say, my preferencewould be to retaliate by boycotting the institutions and produce ofthe Left. The Marxist kibbutzim of the Hashomer Hatzair movement areobvious inviting targets. I would love to see youngsters handing outleaflets in front of book stores with the names of treasonous writersthat Israelis are urged not to buy, and ditto for disks of treasonoussingers. The point is that the Israeli political establishment hasstomped upon freedom of speech in so many ways that I am reluctant toadd any more bludgeons to its arsenal.

You may recall the attempt by the American Left to organize a boycottagainst Arizona after it passed a law cracking down on illegalimmigration. Opponents of the boycotters then organizedcounter-boycotts. The Arizona boycott fizzled out before there wereany serious attempts to challenge it in Congress or in the courts.Nevertheless, there are reasons to suspect that the boycott againstArizona was unconstitutional. See this:http://themoderatevoice.com/72379/are-arizona-boycotts-unconstitutional/. There is says: "In Dean Milk v. City of Madison, 340 U.S. 349(1951), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that municipalities may not passordinances that discriminate against interstate commerce unless doingso is the only possible way to fulfill a legitimate local purpose.Unless there is some importance that I am unaware of to thedistinction between discriminating against all interstate commerce anddiscriminating against interstate commerce with a particular state,municipal (as well as presumably state) boycotts against Arizona wouldseem to run directly afoul of Dean Milk. Moreover, it seems verydoubtful on first impression that municipalities could claim thattheir boycotts are justified by a 'legitimate local purpose.' Even ifwe were to accept the doubtful notion that combating discriminationagainst Hispanics in Arizona was a "local purpose" in San Francisco,the fact that the underlying purpose or the boycotts is primarilyexpressive — expressing disapproval — means that there are innumerablealternatives to doing so by impeding interstate commerce. Thus, onfirst blush, I can't see how these boycotts can stand up to aconstitutional challenge."

There are some similarities between the Boycott Arizona movement andthe Boycott Settlers movement. Both of course are initiatives of theunpatriotic Left. But I must say I would feel much more comfortableif Israel would respond to the Left with calls to boycott boycottersand to boycott leftists, rather than make this a matter for stateprosecution.

Calls by Israelis for boycotting all of Israel are different and Istrongly support criminalizing that. Such calls are not ideologicalbickerings, they are outright treason.

Gil Troy: Anti-Israeli campus activists are normalizing hate and death

3. The pro-Hamas Hitlerjugend tried to sneak into Israel over theweekend to go support the terrorists, but their attempt was anear-complete failure. Most of the cheerleaders for terror werestopped before boarding planes to Israel. Most of the rest werestopped at the airport and conducted to Israeli prison, where theyawait free flights home. Why free flights? Because the Israeligovernment consists of idiots. Why release them at all from prison?I just answered that.

And what about my earlier proposal that they be transported to Gazabut then prevented ever from leaving?

No Anthem – No Money, According to Proposed Law by Gil RonenMK Alex Miller, Head of the Knesset's Education, Culture and SportCommittee, is initiating a bill that would make academic institutionsthat do not play the national anthem in their ceremonies ineligiblefor state funding.

The bill was conceived after Haifa University and the HebrewUniversity's School of Social Work refused to play the national anthemat their latest graduation ceremonies. The refusals were explained bythe claim that Arab graduates would be offended by the anthem.

The bill determines that institutes for higher learning that wish tobe funded by the state must play the national anthem at every formalceremony, including commencement ceremonies and other events that havenational meaning.

"In view of the fact that the State of Israel funds the institutes forhigher learning and invests tens of thousands of shekels in everystudent, the decision to keep the anthem out of commencementceremonies is a particularly insolent and unacceptable one."This action has nothing to do with academic freedom and expresses theprivate will of people to use their position and status in order toexpress a radical political stance that disrespects national symbols.Some hinted that they decided to forgo the playing of HaTikva so asnot to offend certain populations. This is a slippery and dangerousslope. What will be the next stage? Will they also remove the nationalflag?"

The Knesset's Education Committee will convene Monday for an urgentmeeting in which Miller intends to notify the heads of academicinstitutions of the legislative initiative. "The Council for HigherLearning and the Council of University Heads should realize that thereis a limit to [their] disregard and cynicism, he warned. He hintedthat if the obligation to play the anthem is written into theuniversities' internal rules and enforced, he would forgo thelegislation.

If you want to tell the education czars what you think of all this, write to:

The Council for Higher Education in Israel

(governmental body that funds and supervises Israeli universities and colleges)